ArticleBMJ open2021
Acupuncture for retinitis pigmentosa: study protocol for a randomised, sham-controlled trial.
Article in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPrimary retinitis pigmentosa (RP) is a common hereditary retinal disease in ophthalmology that has a considerable impact on quality of life, but there are few effective therapeutic strategies. This trial aims to determine the efficacy and safety of acupuncture versus sham acupuncture (SA) for RP. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a study protocol for a randomised, participant-blind, sham-controlled trial. 64 eligible patients with RP will randomly be divided into acupuncture group and SA group. All groups will receive 48 sessions over 3 months. Participants will complete the trial by visiting the research centre in month 6/9 for a follow-up assessment. The primary outcome is visual field mean sensitivity and visual field mean deviation at month 3/6/9 compared with baseline. Secondary outcomes include the best-corrected visual acuity, central macular thickness, subfoveal choroidal thicknes, traditional Chinese medicine syndrome score and the scale of life quality for diseases with visual impairment at month 3/6/9 compared with baseline. Adverse events and safety indexes will be recorded throughout the study. SPSS V.25.0 statistical software was used for analysis, and measurement data were expressed as mean±SD. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval was obtained from the Ethics Committee of the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (approval no: ChiECRCT20200460). The results of this study will be published in a peer-reviewed journal, and trial participants will be informed via email and/or phone calls. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ChiCTR2000041090.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.